2009 Clos de la Roilette Fleurie

originally posted by Bill Lundstrom:
can't imagine having my thirst for beaujolais put on some sort of allocation

Crush was limiting purchases of 09 Lapierre to 6 per person (at least according to the website).

A brave new world.
 
No, but seriously!

This thread disconcerts.

There is SO MUCH tasty, silly-priced wine out there. Why group like crazy nuts fish around this? Why post about it, back and forth?

Y'all are making me mad. Mad, I say.

There will be something even cooler, even cheaper! I'll lead the way.

Btw, you should check out the concern of Saigne and M. Invisible. They might have some interesting stuff, soon.
 
Oh, pshaw! Like Thierry Puzelat isn't already. Or the Jura.

Of course, the curve is more camel-like. Who knows what's best.

These days, I'm just drinkin' natural grenache gris.
 
Thus far, 508 bottles of the Tardive have been purchased on Cellartracker. That's not quite a pallet.

209 bottles of the Roilette.

I would guess that there are at least 200 cases of the CT available for the US and half again more of the Roilette.

Let's not get all worked up.
 
originally posted by Rahsaan:
originally posted by Bill Lundstrom:
can't imagine having my thirst for beaujolais put on some sort of allocation

Crush was limiting purchases of 09 Lapierre to 6 per person (at least according to the website).

A brave new world.

6 is all I want and all I bought (but locally).
 
originally posted by VLM:
6 is all I want and all I bought (but locally).

That's more than I want or will buy (most likely). But the phrase "limited to 6 bottles per person" was not something I'm used to seeing for the kinds of wines I buy.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Jura? Try laying your hands on some Overnoy over here.

It's only wine.

It's never good when someone in a movie theater screams, "Fire!"

If you can't get Overnoy, pony up and settle in with some Fourrier Chambolle and leave your worries on the doorstep.

Do you line up the night before for new cell phone releases?
 
Remember the e-mail blast from Chambers about the earlier shipment? Went something like:
2009 Beaujolais: Greatest Vintage Since 2008.

(Always a good reference is Kermit Lynch's vintage chart.)
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
The Madness of Queen Sharon!

Anyway, I can't afford Fourrier, and I'm more addicted to worry than I am to wine. But you're right, of course.

Specious. You can, just less of it.
 
originally posted by Sharon Bowman:

It's never good when someone in a movie theater screams, "Fire!"

What are you supposed to scream if you see a fire in a movie theater?

Anyway, I may not own enough 2009 Beaujolais but I own enough wine so it works out.
 
The original quotation is "The most stringent protections of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater..."

Thus, shouting "fire" is cool, so long as there was a real fire.
 
originally posted by Yule Kim:
The original quotation is "The most stringent protections of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater..."

Thus, shouting "fire" is cool, so long as there was a real fire.
But probably contrary to the self-interest of the shouter, who would be better off making his way to the exit before the ensuing panic begins.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Yule Kim:
The original quotation is "The most stringent protections of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater..."

Thus, shouting "fire" is cool, so long as there was a real fire.
But probably contrary to the self-interest of the shouter, who would be better off making his way to the exit before the ensuing panic begins.

Oh, so now you get it.
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Yule Kim:
The original quotation is "The most stringent protections of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater..."

Thus, shouting "fire" is cool, so long as there was a real fire.
But probably contrary to the self-interest of the shouter, who would be better off making his way to the exit before the ensuing panic begins.

Oh, so now you get it.
Oh, I'm guessing he got it, probably two cases worth.
 
originally posted by Keith Levenberg:
originally posted by Yule Kim:
The original quotation is "The most stringent protections of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater..."

Thus, shouting "fire" is cool, so long as there was a real fire.
But probably contrary to the self-interest of the shouter, who would be better off making his way to the exit before the ensuing panic begins.
You're supposed to get your family and friends in the front of the line first too.
 
Back
Top